|
JonBongGroovy


Registered: 01/23/15
Posts: 2,875
Loc: Hawaii
|
New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal
#23926602 - 12/14/16 03:45 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
https://www.leafly.com/news/politics/new-dea-rule-says-cbd-oil-really-truly-no-joke-illegal
The US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) made CBD oil a little more federally illegal in a little-noticed bureaucratic maneuver this morning. Today’s Federal Register (Dec. 14, 2016) contains an item (21 CFR Part 1308) that establishes a new drug code for “marihuana extract.” “This code,” wrote DEA Acting Administrator Chuck Rosenberg, “will allow DEA and DEA-registered entities to track quantities of this material separately from quantities of marihuana.” The move, the Register entry explained, is meant to bring the US into compliance with international drug-control treaties. There is no major change in law brought about by the Register item. Rather, it serves to clarify and reinforce the DEA’s position on all cannabis extracts, including CBD oil. That position is: They are all federally illegal Schedule I substances. CBD oil derived from hemp is now commonly available nationwide via web sites and mail order services. Those operations survive on the assumption that cannabidiol products below the legal threshold for THC percentage in hemp (0.3 percent or less) are technically legal. Not so, says the DEA. In the DEA comment on the entry, Rosenberg directly addressed the question: What if it’s only cannabidiol (CBD) and no other cannabinoids? The agency’s response: “For practical purposes, all extracts that contain CBD will also contain at least small amounts of other cannabinoids. However, if it were possible to produce from the cannabis plant an extract that contained only CBD and no other cannabinoids, such an extract would fall within the new drug code” and therefore remain federally illegal. In other words: The DEA is confident that it can find enough traces of other cannabinoids in your CBD oil to arrest and prosecute. And if they can’t, they still have the option of arresting and prosecuting based on the CBD oil itself.
Note: This article contains an update on the legal status of CBD products, below the original text.
The US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) made CBD oil a little more federally illegal in a little-noticed bureaucratic maneuver this morning. Today’s Federal Register (Dec. 14, 2016) contains an item (21 CFR Part 1308) that establishes a new drug code for “marihuana extract.” “This code,” wrote DEA Acting Administrator Chuck Rosenberg, “will allow DEA and DEA-registered entities to track quantities of this material separately from quantities of marihuana.” The move, the Register entry explained, is meant to bring the US into compliance with international drug-control treaties. There is no major change in law brought about by the Register item. Rather, it serves to clarify and reinforce the DEA’s position on all cannabis extracts, including CBD oil. That position is: They are all federally illegal Schedule I substances. CBD oil derived from hemp is now commonly available nationwide via web sites and mail order services. Those operations survive on the assumption that cannabidiol products below the legal threshold for THC percentage in hemp (0.3 percent or less) are technically legal. Not so, says the DEA. In the DEA comment on the entry, Rosenberg directly addressed the question: What if it’s only cannabidiol (CBD) and no other cannabinoids? The agency’s response: “For practical purposes, all extracts that contain CBD will also contain at least small amounts of other cannabinoids. However, if it were possible to produce from the cannabis plant an extract that contained only CBD and no other cannabinoids, such an extract would fall within the new drug code” and therefore remain federally illegal. In other words: The DEA is confident that it can find enough traces of other cannabinoids in your CBD oil to arrest and prosecute. And if they can’t, they still have the option of arresting and prosecuting based on the CBD oil itself.
RELATED STORY Is CBD from Cannabis the Same as CBD from Cannabis? Is your CBD derived from hemp? Doesn’t matter to the DEA. The new extracts classification applies to all “extracts that have been derived from any plant of the genus Cannabis and which contain cannabinols and cannabidiols.” Hemp is not a separate genus. (Although it may be a separate species; lot of debate on that point.) Legally speaking, hemp is simply cannabis with no more than 0.3 percent THC content. The new rule seems to clarify the DEA’s position on hemp-derived CBD, which entered a legal gray area following Congress’ passage of the 2014 farm bill. That legislation allowed certain states to grow hemp in pilot projects, and blocked federal law enforcement authorities (ie, the DEA) from interfering with state agencies, hemp growers, and agricultural research. What DEA Administrator Rosenberg seems to be saying with this clarification is: You may be able to grow hemp. But if you try to extract CBD oil from it, the DEA considers that a federal crime. The rule did not contain any hint as to when the DEA will step into the 21st century and stop using the archaic version of the word “marihuana.” UPDATE 12/14/2016, 2:20pm PST: Although the DEA considers CBD oil to be a federally illegal Schedule I drug, there are temporary safeguards in place that protect patients in many states from federal prosecution over possession of the oil. The Rohrabacher-Farr amendment is the most important of those protections. Originally passed in 2014, the amendment to a Congressional appropriations bill prohibits the Justice Department from spending funds to interfere with the implementation of state medical cannabis laws. (It is silent on adult-use laws.) In August, the federal 9th US Circuit Court upheld Rohrabacher-Farr in the face of a challenge brought by federal prosecutors. Leafly has an explanation of that case here.
The amendment is the chief piece of legislation preventing federal law enforcement officials from prosecuting patients for possessing CBD products in the 28 legal medical cannabis states, and the District of Columbia. In addition, 16 states have passed so-called CBD-only laws that allow patients and caregivers to possess non-psychoactive CBD products. Those CBD-only laws usually allow no legal avenue to produce or obtain the products, however.
Rohrabacher-Farr must be renewed every year. If it’s not, its safeguards disappear. The amendment was most recently renewed last Friday, Dec. 9, as part of the continuing House resolution known as HR 2028, which funds the federal government through April 28, 2017. When that resolution expires next April, so does the protections afforded by Rohrabacher-Farr. Unless it’s renewed once again.
Lead Image: Brennan Linsley/AP
--------------------
|
Ran-D



Registered: 12/19/10
Posts: 16,313
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: JonBongGroovy]
#23926731 - 12/14/16 04:22 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Well, there are already farmers in Colorado growing acres of hemp solely to produce CBD products. Hopefully they are left alone.
|
afrogus
hombre



Registered: 01/23/11
Posts: 914
Loc: Cali
Last seen: 1 day, 2 hours
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: Ran-D] 1
#23927136 - 12/14/16 06:02 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Can't interfere with the pharmaceutical industries profits!
-------------------- "Leave no turn unstoned":)
|
Konyap

Registered: 06/30/07
Posts: 33,945
Loc: Planet Piss
Last seen: 4 years, 2 months
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: afrogus] 3
#23927162 - 12/14/16 06:10 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
this countries a joke now
|
404
error


Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 14,539
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: JonBongGroovy] 1
#23927248 - 12/14/16 06:41 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
OP, should have just posted from the register itself.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/12/14/2016-29941/establishment-of-a-new-drug-code-for-marihuana-extract
basically they created a new rule to put all extracts of cannabis as illegal... this is not really anything new afaik, as CBD has been a schedule 1 substance since at least 2013.
we should start thinking about disbanding or repurposing the DEA.
|
Dest
Roller-Derby Coach


Registered: 06/14/09
Posts: 2,444
Last seen: 6 years, 5 months
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: 404]
#23927579 - 12/14/16 08:35 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
So how does this agency come to this conclusion when
Quote:
Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are:
heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote
?
Even stacked against the following empirical evidence: The case for medical marijuana in epilepsy First published: 22 May 2014 DOI: 10.1111/epi.12610
Cannabidiol: Pharmacology and potential therapeutic role in epilepsy and other neuropsychiatric disorders Maria Roberta Cilio, Elizabeth A. Thiele, Orrin Devinsky Published Date 22 May 2014
Current Status and Prospects for Cannabidiol Preparations as New Therapeutic Agents Pius S. Fasinu, Sarah Phillips, Mahmoud A. ElSohly, Larry A. Walker Published Date 21 July 2016
Phytocannabinoids and epilepsy R. G. dos Santos, J. E. C. Hallak, J. P. Leite, A. W. Zuardi, J. A. S. Crippa Published Date 4 December 2014
Duration of use of oral cannabis extract in a cohort of pediatric epilepsy patients Lauren Treat, Kevin E. Chapman, Kathryn L. Colborn, Kelly G. Knupp Published Date 18 November 2016
The only clear answer is the following in bold.
Quote:
Please note that a substance need not be listed as a controlled substance to be treated as a Schedule I substance for criminal prosecution. A controlled substance analogue is a substance which is intended for human consumption and is structurally or pharmacologically substantially similar to or is represented as being similar to a Schedule I or Schedule II substance and is not an approved medication in the United States. (See 21 U.S.C. §802(32)(A) for the definition of a controlled substance analogue and 21 U.S.C. §813 for the schedule.)
Where approved must mean approved by the FDA.
Had a CBD oil product even been submitted to the FDA by now there would be no grounds for the DEA to place CBD on the schedule I list.
|
LSDollar


Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 2,361
Loc: Up Up and Away
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: Dest]
#23927957 - 12/14/16 10:47 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Money hungry bastards. Why don't they go after the big pharma companies that are pushing fetynl to people that really don't need it. Not to mention USA has 5% population, but uses 90% of the big pharmas pain killers. Need to seriously get their shit together. Guns kill less people than OD this last year. They sure are doing a swell job!
|
JonBongGroovy


Registered: 01/23/15
Posts: 2,875
Loc: Hawaii
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: 404]
#23928246 - 12/15/16 02:22 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
404 said: OP, should have just posted from the register itself.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/12/14/2016-29941/establishment-of-a-new-drug-code-for-marihuana-extract
basically they created a new rule to put all extracts of cannabis as illegal... this is not really anything new afaik, as CBD has been a schedule 1 substance since at least 2013.
we should start thinking about disbanding or repurposing the DEA.
You can still buy oil at headshops it's not a law yet
--------------------
Edited by JonBongGroovy (12/15/16 05:36 AM)
|
badchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,372
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: Dest]
#23928333 - 12/15/16 03:48 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Dest said: So how does this agency come to this conclusion when
Quote:
Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are:
heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote
?
You're on the right track. A published study does not qualify for "medical use," an FDA approval does though.
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
JonBongGroovy


Registered: 01/23/15
Posts: 2,875
Loc: Hawaii
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: JonBongGroovy]
#23928408 - 12/15/16 05:39 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I believe the people who posted this article don't actually understand what the law is going to be yet the may have jumped the gun.
--------------------
|
Shiithead
Your Huckleberry



Registered: 04/05/13
Posts: 9,997
Loc: God's Flat Green Earth
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: JonBongGroovy] 3
#23929385 - 12/15/16 01:21 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
--------------------
Ephesians 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Psalm 12:6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Hebrews 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. Revelation 3:11 Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.
|
durian_2008
Cornucopian Eating an Elephant



Registered: 04/02/08
Posts: 16,693
Loc: Raccoon City
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: Shiithead]
#23932612 - 12/16/16 02:19 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Probably, about 95% of the biomass, which the plant will ever grow, would be medically-useless, unless someone was to make a concentrate.
I am not saying that I would share the road, at highway speeds, take medical or financial advice, from someone who is seriously indisposed.
|
JonBongGroovy


Registered: 01/23/15
Posts: 2,875
Loc: Hawaii
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: JonBongGroovy]
#23932857 - 12/16/16 04:02 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?m=1101194848320&ca=3cedfb01-f776-4fb4-bec7-92900b5d0482
The Sky is NOT Falling
Yesterday the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) issued a Final Rule on the coding of marijuana extracts. Unfortunately some misleading media stories and social media postings lead quite a few people to panic at reports that CBD was being banned under this new rule.
The Sky is NOT Falling. The Final Rule published by DEA did not change the legal status of CBD. This can only be done by a scheduling action which has NOT occurred.
HIA has carefully reviewed this with our legal advisors and discussed it with industry experts. While there are some differing opinions on the effect of the rule, there is general agreement that yesterday's ruling did not change the status of CBD. Here are some important facts to know: Cannabidiol is not listed on the federal schedule of controlled substances Sec. 7606 of the Farm Bill defines hemp as distinct from marijuana and does not treat it as a controlled substance when grown under a compliant state program Despite these facts, DEA has stated that CBD is a controlled substance previously HIA strongly disagrees with the DEA position and is ready to take action to defend should DEA take any action to block the production, processing or sale of hemp under Sec. 7606 The Final Rule published on December 14th was not a scheduling action but rather an administrative action related to record keeping The code assigned to "marihuana extract" in the rule is "Administration Controlled Substances Code Number" for the purposes of identification of substances on registration forms The rule was originally published as a proposed rule in 2011 BEFORE the Farm Bill and didn't mention CBD or hemp DEA confirmed to a reporter from the Denver Post that this was an administrative action and did not change the status of CBD in federal law So what does this all mean? We believe the DEA rule on "marihuana extracts" was not directed at hemp derived CBD products and has been in the works for 5 years. We also believe there is no imminent change in DEA policy regarding hemp derived CBD products.
However, we do have some serious concerns about the Final Rule. DEA's addition of unscheduled substances to the Administration Controlled Substances Code List is problematic. Substances that have not been properly scheduled should not be on the list as this can create confusion in the marketplace and also result in other federal agencies improperly treating legal substances as controlled. We are working with our attorneys on the best course of action and will keep you updated as we move forward.
For now, we want to urge everyone to calm down and continue with your businesses. We also hope that in future, reporters will take the time to get the facts before posting misleading stories about hemp and CBD.
--------------------
|
Connoisseur

Registered: 05/13/11
Posts: 34,686
Last seen: 5 years, 2 months
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: JonBongGroovy]
#23934369 - 12/17/16 03:00 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
fuck that
|
404
error


Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 14,539
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: JonBongGroovy]
#23934995 - 12/17/16 10:23 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
GetFuckingWierd said: http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?m=1101194848320&ca=3cedfb01-f776-4fb4-bec7-92900b5d0482
The Sky is NOT Falling
Yesterday the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) issued a Final Rule on the coding of marijuana extracts. Unfortunately some misleading media stories and social media postings lead quite a few people to panic at reports that CBD was being banned under this new rule.
The Sky is NOT Falling. The Final Rule published by DEA did not change the legal status of CBD. This can only be done by a scheduling action which has NOT occurred.
HIA has carefully reviewed this with our legal advisors and discussed it with industry experts. While there are some differing opinions on the effect of the rule, there is general agreement that yesterday's ruling did not change the status of CBD. Here are some important facts to know: Cannabidiol is not listed on the federal schedule of controlled substances Sec. 7606 of the Farm Bill defines hemp as distinct from marijuana and does not treat it as a controlled substance when grown under a compliant state program Despite these facts, DEA has stated that CBD is a controlled substance previously HIA strongly disagrees with the DEA position and is ready to take action to defend should DEA take any action to block the production, processing or sale of hemp under Sec. 7606 The Final Rule published on December 14th was not a scheduling action but rather an administrative action related to record keeping The code assigned to "marihuana extract" in the rule is "Administration Controlled Substances Code Number" for the purposes of identification of substances on registration forms The rule was originally published as a proposed rule in 2011 BEFORE the Farm Bill and didn't mention CBD or hemp DEA confirmed to a reporter from the Denver Post that this was an administrative action and did not change the status of CBD in federal law So what does this all mean? We believe the DEA rule on "marihuana extracts" was not directed at hemp derived CBD products and has been in the works for 5 years. We also believe there is no imminent change in DEA policy regarding hemp derived CBD products.
However, we do have some serious concerns about the Final Rule. DEA's addition of unscheduled substances to the Administration Controlled Substances Code List is problematic. Substances that have not been properly scheduled should not be on the list as this can create confusion in the marketplace and also result in other federal agencies improperly treating legal substances as controlled. We are working with our attorneys on the best course of action and will keep you updated as we move forward.
For now, we want to urge everyone to calm down and continue with your businesses. We also hope that in future, reporters will take the time to get the facts before posting misleading stories about hemp and CBD.
Nope
Quote:
PART 1308—SCHEDULES OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ■ 1. The authority citation for part 1308 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b), unless otherwise noted. ■ 2. Section 1308.11 is amended by adding paragraph (d)(58) to read as follows: § 1308.11 Schedule I. * * * * * (d) * * * (58) Marihuana Extract—(7350) Meaning an extract containing one or more cannabinoids that has been derived from any plant of the genus Cannabis, other than the separated resin (whether crude or purified) obtained from the plant. * * * * *
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-12-14/pdf/2016-29941.pdf?utm_campaign=subscription%20mailing%20list&utm_source=federalregister.gov&utm_medium=email
|
JonBongGroovy


Registered: 01/23/15
Posts: 2,875
Loc: Hawaii
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: 404]
#23935041 - 12/17/16 10:41 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
--------------------
|
badchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,372
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: JonBongGroovy] 2
#23935219 - 12/17/16 12:04 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
404 is right. DEA has considered CBD Schedule 1 for a while now.
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
CLIT
Stranger
Registered: 01/23/12
Posts: 2,758
Last seen: 1 year, 11 days
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: badchad]
#23937238 - 12/18/16 05:24 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
why is it even scheduled? Is it even recreational or addicting?
|
404
error


Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 14,539
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: CLIT] 1
#23937460 - 12/18/16 09:05 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
not really, no. there's no effect* on psychomotor function or any real response from the mesolymbic system i don't think, hence why people don't get high on it. it's a blanket scheduling, any extract of any particular cannabinoid from the plant.
edit: typos
Edited by 404 (12/19/16 02:42 PM)
|
M3G4N666
Stranger in a Strange Land



Registered: 10/30/16
Posts: 21
Last seen: 7 years, 21 days
|
Re: New DEA Rule Says CBD Oil is Really, Truly, No-Joke Illegal [Re: Konyap]
#23938052 - 12/18/16 01:28 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Konyap said: this countries a joke now
Couldn't agree more. one big sadistic joke.
-------------------- “The apocalypse is not something which is coming. The apocalypse has arrived in major portions of the planet and it’s only because we live within a bubble of incredible privilege and social insulation that we still have the luxury of anticipating the apocalypse.” -Terence McKenna
|
|